If SWGB 2 added heroes......

[lukeiamyourdad]

Maybe we shouldn't give the option of both generic and movie heroes. There really won't be much of a point since most of the people will choose the movie heroes anyway. They'll want them in-game.

 

We, on the other hand, don't really want movie heroes since it hampers realism. Maybe I should post a poll about it.

[Lord_Angelus]

Thats true, hmm how about when you create the hero you could chose for it to be a movie character or a generic character.

 

If the characters are developed like WC3, it could be something like this:

 

Movie characters would have a much more limited range of skills to develop (Darth Vader wouldn't have much in the way of diplomacy based abilities for example). They also have the weakness of their nemesis.

 

Or the player could build a Generic hero which would have a random name generated (and players could rename them if they wanted, just double click on the name and type in the new one).

 

The player would then have to develop that hero by selecting skills to level up as the hero gains experience.

 

There would be several different skill trees, Force Powers, Political Abilities, Combat Abilities, Covert Abilities etc. The player would be only be able to max out one of these trees and maybe have a few extra abilities, or they could spread out the skills evenly.

 

The appearence of the hero would change depending on the choices made, if the player goes heavily into force powers, the hero would eventually change to a Jedi Master. If they went into politics the hero would eventually wear some elaborate clothes as we see in the prequels.

 

Worf

[FroZticles]

See we are going backwards I don't want movie heroes in the regular rm in campaigns I'm all for it. I don't want the heroes to be anything like WC3. We want a RTS not a RPS

[Admiral Vostok]

I agree. I think what you've described, Angelus, is far too complicated for an RTS.

 

Now I find the idea of realism when it relates to the presence of the movie characters a bit perplexing. As a purist I am divided between two schools of thought:

 

1) It would be good if movie characters were included, because it relates the game more to the movies which is excellent. From this point of view having generic-named heroes distances the game from the movies and makes it "less-pure".

 

2) Including the movie characters "re-writes" the story of the movies, because if Luke Skywalker dies, well obviously that's not what went on in the movie. It doesn't matter if generic characters die because they aren't in the movies. So in this way including the movie characters makes it less pure.

 

I have been tossing up between the two schools of thought. Neither is better than the other from a Purism point of view, I think. So I think I'll turn to Gameplay rather than Realism, because lets face it, it is much more fun to play with the movie characters. This will also be more attractive to non-Star Wars fans.

 

So I want Movie characters, not generic characters.

[Lord_Angelus]

Originally posted by Admiral Vostok

I agree. I think what you've described, Angelus, is far too complicated for an RTS.

 

Fair enough.

 

I think movie characters would probably be a more popular choice for most gamers and fans. Ok, so some of them will die but Rebellion used movie characters and they could (and did) die.

 

Worf

[lukeiamyourdad]

Fair enough. Movie heroes it is.

[Lord_Angelus]

How about the nemesis idea?

 

I'm still trying to think of how to balance out the heros who wouldnt be connected, lets say a Trade Federation player vs a Rebel player would mean Maul vs Luke.

 

Hmm, something that just came to me, there could be a building somewhere on the map (Cantina?) where you can hire a bounty hunter (Boba/Jango Fett perhaps?) to hunt down an enemy hero.

 

You wouldn't be able to control the bounty hunter and it would be expensive. Maybe the price you pay could affect which bounty hunter you get.

 

1000 Nova - Dengar

2000 Nova - Bossk

4000 Nova - IG-88

8000 Nova - Boba Fett

 

The bounty hunters could only be hired by one player at a time (so there wouldn't be 2+ Boba Fetts running around)

 

Worf

[Admiral Vostok]

Not a bad idea with the bounty hunters. Similar to some of the other ideas floating around here.

 

As for the nemesisisisies idea, it's not a bad concept but it could get a bit weird. What if you've got two players playing as Rebels? Would Luke fight Luke? Or if you've got two Rebel players and two Imperial players, then you have two Lukes and two Vaders and something weird might happen.

[FroZticles]

I'm not settling with movie heroes in normal rm it may be fun but its definately not what most gamers would want. And from a gamers stand point its if you play online I would rather some made up hero in a civs arsenal then a movie hero.

 

Movie heroes are campaigns and scenarios. Normal are with random maps.

 

WC3 had half the idea they did not mix there hero units from the campaign into a races normal army. But it still had the same skin and powers just a different name so they were half way there but not the full distance.

[Lord_Angelus]

I dont see people accepting a character that looks like Darth Vader but uses the name Darth Random.

 

Worf

[lukeiamyourdad]

From a marketing standpoint it's logical to use movie heroes.

 

On the box what do you think would attract a Star wars fan:

 

-Unleash your randomly generated heroes against your foes?

 

Or

 

-Unleash heroes such as Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader on your foes?

[FroZticles]

I didn't say randomly generated heroes......

 

I guess Ill have to finish my template before any of you understand.....

[Admiral Vostok]

The difference is that ALL of the characters in Warcraft III were made either specifically for the game, or were made specifically for it's predecessors so they must appear in the sequel. With Star Wars, the characters already exist, the game is just using them.

 

No-one would have cared if the back of the WC3 box said "play as Prince Arthas!" but people would care if the back of the SWGB2 box said "play as Darth Vader!"

 

And I don't see how playing on the zone gives you any better judgement on what the name of a character should be. It might give you insight into how people play, but not what the name of a character should be. That's just taking things too far, Froz.

[Darth Windu]

Ever considered minor movie characters? (eg Eeth Koth, General Dodonna, Queen Jamilla etc)

[DarthMuffin]

Just to get back for a sec to movie heroes :

 

Are you guys sure that having movie heroes in RM games is "more-pure"?

 

For me, games and movies should not interfere (i.e.: Luke shouldn't be in a RM because he's not in a RM in the movies).

 

That's just my point of vue... I would keep movie heroes for campaigns.

[lukeiamyourdad]

We have to think that not only Star Wars purist will play the game. Many others will and having movie heores in RM will have more appeal to these people(who, if I dare say, composes the majority of buyers).

[FroZticles]

Well sorry to say but I don't post ideas to keep you people happy........

[Admiral Vostok]

Froz - That's for sure.

 

Windu - The problem is people would much rather play as major characters than minor characters. Minor movie characters would be fine for campaigns but I wouldn't think they'd make good buildable heroes. Read on for clarification...

 

Darth54 - Yes, movie characters in RM are more pure because of the following reasoning: the campaigns tell a story that either goes along with the movies or expands on them. RM games have no bearing on the movies because they're essentially fantasy battles - if you can have the Rebellion fighting the Republic then no-one should be under the impression the game is consistent with the movies.

 

Quite often campaigns will feature parts from the movies but alter them to make a better game. Because of the alterations, the games become less pure, so the presence of movie characters can really effect purity. In RM movie characters can be fine because you're not playing as part of the movies, you're just playing a "what if?" battle.

 

So I think buildable heroes should not be available in the campaigns, instead you start with a few heroes important to the story, which may or may not be movie characters depending on the plot of the campaigns. In RM you get to build movie characters, because RM is the most played part of a game and movie characters will be popular.

 

A way to think about it is the way Jedi were used in the Rebel and Imperial Campaigns of SWGB1. In both of these campaigns, you could not build a Jedi Temple, because that would be horrifically impure... in fact now I think about it you couldn't build Jedi Temples in any of the SWGB Campaigns, only in the Clone Campaigns. Yet Jedi and Sith Temples are buildable in RM, because RM is just for fun, and isn't trying to be consistent with the movies.

 

I hope everyone could understand what I was on about. Basically what I'm saying is this: I'm Lord of the Purists, so if it's okay by me I don't think other purists will mind. I'm fine with playing Echuu Shen Jon in the campaigns but I'd rather not build him in an RM...

[DarthMuffin]

Originally posted by Admiral Vostok

if you can have the Rebellion fighting the Republic then no-one should be under the impression the game is consistent with the movies.

 

Alright, you've made your point. I'll shut up now

[FroZticles]

Vostok you said you wanted movie characters now you don't........

[Lord_Angelus]

I agree, it is possible that the movie characters might recreate historical battles using holographic technology in their spare time (between movies, books, games etc), or maybe they are training simulators where they are helping the new recruits train for combat.

 

Lord Angelus

[Admiral Vostok]

Froz: No I still want movie characters, but only in RM. In the campaigns, I think there should be no buildable heroes, but you start each scenario with the relevant heroes for the storyline of the campaign. These heroes in the campaigns could be either movie characters or made up ones or both.

[FroZticles]

Again Vostok you throw words into my mouth, what I ment was that you start off or gain heroes through the campaign but not building them. In RM its different you hire a non movie hero but it is buildable.

[Admiral Vostok]

Froz, I was just referring to the fact that you suggested I didn't want movie hereos, when in fact I do. What do you mean I throw words in your mouth? I'm confused...

[FroZticles]

So you want movie heroes in RM and campaigns......

 

For a purist thats very un pure.